Having run and participated in a number of interesting events recently I have been thinking about the formats that we use, and which structures produce an effective environment for engagement and constructive collaboration. It strikes me as odd that although I’m writing from the ‘Future Summit‘, that we are using the same elements as we have for the last few decades – keynote speakers, panel discussions, ‘experts’ vs ‘audience’. What’s so new about all of that? We need to iterate in this space.
Let’s iterate the actual event format, not just the topics.
How can we ensure that innovation exists as part of the event process, not just as a topic? The switch in decentralised structures towards centralised structures, and in centralised structures to decentralised structures has lead to some interesting changes. When I’m speaking to a group I wonder “Why aren’t these amazing people talking to each other? One to many conversation seems a wasted opportunity.”
The infrastructure for backchannel conversations
Donal from Nodecity set up a Meraki-based mesh wifi network across the venue to provide web access to all participants, and there has been amazing discussion happening over twitter with the #futuresummit tag. The issue is the difference in momentum between the realtime twitter feed and the pace that a panel runs with – the panel format is simply not cut out for it. Live screens on the wall behind the speakers is something that the technically-minded often jump to implement, but in my experience this is far too open to abuse and rarely works. Having an exploratory browsing screen open using a tool like Tweetviz or Visible Tweets in the foyer on the other hand is fantastic for stimulating discussion.
The Human “Twitter Proxy”
It’s important to choose the medium that complements the existing atmosphere. To integrate a wider audience through Twitter in a panel format a human “Twitter Proxy” works really well. This is a person who is simply watching, interacting and aggregating the Twitter stream who the panel can ask directly for question and comment. “Twitter” takes the form of a person.
This idea might be combined with some sort of prioritisation system that allows people on the web to ask questions too - Digg Dialogg is a good example of this in action because they announce who will be interviewed before allowing the community to prioritise the questions that will be asked.
The Emergent Event
Continue the trend from mechanical structures towards organic structures, the strict hierarchy of a panel is not organic – conversations evolve over time. They don’t have a fixed time frame, they split topics and get ‘sidetracked,’ and most importantly – people lose interest and personal relevancy.
The idea of ‘voting with your feet’ is very useful here because when you set the expectation up-front that if a session isn’t personally relevant right now that you should walk to another one, the interesting sessions will live while the others dissipate. Backchannels like twitter can be used to tie all of the conversations together and as well as share ideas with people outside the physical face to face event.
Where can we see this in action?
I’m starting to see some of these more emergent and self-organising ideas appear in the form of Trampoline, Jelly, Creative Performance Exchange, and The Hive - and I’m sure there are many more out there on the edges that will become much more popular in the coming months.
Are you ready for a more emergent and realtime format?
3,314 people have read this since it was posted May 2009. Keep reading?
